You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under
chapter 552 of the Government Code, the Public Information Act (the "Act"). Your request
was assigned ID# 135501.

The City of Richardson Police Department (the "department") received a request for
personnel records of four identified former or current department employees. You claim that
the personal financial information regarding the city's deferred compensation plan, flexplan
programs and retirement in the individual's personnel files is protected from disclosure by
a common law right to privacy. Consequently, you redacted this information prior to
releasing to the requestor copies of each individual's personnel record.(1) You ask that this
office issue a ruling as to whether the personal financial information must be produced.

Section 552.101 excepts "information considered to be confidential by law, either
constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." This exception applies to information made
confidential by the common law right to privacy. Industrial Foundation v. Texas Industrial
Accident Board, 540 S.W.2d 668 (Tex. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 931 (1977).
Information may be withheld under section 552.101 in conjunction with the common law
right to privacy if the information contains highly intimate or embarrassing facts about a
person's private affairs such that release of the information would be highly objectionable
to a reasonable person and if the information is of no legitimate concern to the public. Id.
The constitutional right to privacy protects two interests. Open Records Decision
No. 600 at 4 (1992) (citing Ramie v. City of Hedwig Village, 765 F.2d 490 (5th Cir. 1985),
cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1062 (1986)). The first is the interest in independence in making
certain important decisions related to the "zones of privacy" recognized by the United States
Supreme Court. Open Records Decision No. 600 at 4 (1992). The zones of privacy
recognized by the United States Supreme Court are matters pertaining to marriage,
procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education. See id.

Financial information concerning an individual is in some cases protected by a common law
right of privacy. Open Records Decision Nos. 600 (1992) (information about public
employee's participation in a group insurance program, retirement benefits beneficiaries, tax
exempt reimbursement accounts, and direct deposit), 545 (1990) (information about a public
employee's participation in a deferred compensation plan). A previous opinion of this office
states that "all financial information relating to an individual . . . ordinarily satisfies the first
requirement of common law privacy, in that it constitutes highly intimate or embarrassing
facts about the individual, such that its public disclosure would be highly objectionable to
a person of ordinary sensibilities." Open Records Decision No. 373 at 3 (1983). A public
employee's allocation of his salary to a voluntary investment program offered by his
employer is a personal investment decision, and information about it is excepted from
disclosure by a common law right of privacy. Open Records Decision No. 545 (deferred
compensation plan). On the other hand, this office has held that an employee's participation
in the Texas Municipal Retirement System is not excepted from disclosure under common
law privacy. Open Records Decision Nos. 600 at 10 (1992), 480 (1987). However, the
beneficiary and financial information regarding an employee's retirement benefits are
excepted from disclosure by a common law right of privacy. Id. We therefore conclude that
as no legitimate public interest exists in the employees' participation in the city's deferred
compensation plan, and flexplan programs, you must withhold the forms in their entirety
under section 552.101 as confidential under the common law right to privacy. In addition,
the department must withhold from disclosure the beneficiary and financial information
pertaining to the employee's retirement benefits. Also, based on section 552.101 in
conjunction with the common law right to privacy, we have marked the retirement
information you must not release to the requestor.

This letter ruling is limited to the particular records at issue in this request and limited to the
facts as presented to us; therefore, this ruling must not be relied upon as a previous
determination regarding any other records or any other circumstances.

This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the
governmental body and of the requestor. For example, governmental bodies are prohibited
from asking the attorney general to reconsider this ruling. Gov't Code § 552.301(f). If the
governmental body wants to challenge this ruling, the governmental body must appeal by
filing suit in Travis County within 30 calendar days. Id. § 552.324(b). In order to get the full
benefit of such an appeal, the governmental body must file suit within 10 calendar days.
Id. § 552.353(b)(3), (c). If the governmental body does not appeal this ruling and the
governmental body does not comply with it, then both the requestor and the attorney general
have the right to file suit against the governmental body to enforce this ruling.
Id. § 552.321(a).

If this ruling requires the governmental body to release all or part of the requested
information, the governmental body is responsible for taking the next step. Based on the
statute, the attorney general expects that, within 10 calendar days of this ruling, the
governmental body will do one of the following three things: 1) release the public records;
2) notify the requestor of the exact day, time, and place that copies of the records will be
provided or that the records can be inspected; or 3) notify the requestor of the governmental
body's intent to challenge this letter ruling in court. If the governmental body fails to do one
of these three things within 10 calendar days of this ruling, then the requestor should report
that failure to the attorney general's Open Government Hotline, toll free, at 877/673-6839.
The requestor may also file a complaint with the district or county attorney.
Id. § 552.3215(e).

If this ruling requires or permits the governmental body to withhold all or some of the
requested information, the requestor can appeal that decision by suing the governmental
body. Id. § 552.321(a); Texas Department of Public Safety v. Gilbreath, 842 S.W.2d 408, 411 (Tex. App.--Austin 1992, no writ).

If the governmental body, the requestor, or any other person has questions or comments
about this ruling, they may contact our office. Although there is no statutory deadline for
contacting us, the attorney general prefers to receive any comments within 10 calendar days
of the date of this ruling.

1. We note that, prior to their release to the requestor, the department also redacted from the personnel records, the social security number, home address, driver license number information and photos of the peace officers presumably in accordance with sections 552.117, 552.130 and 552.119, which are mandatory exceptions under the Act.